I get the whole Romneycare thing.. It's what the state needed.. And obviously what's good for one state, isn't always good for all the others. But on meet the press today, Romney said he'd keep the ban on pre-existing conditions nationwide.. But he wants to do away with the mandate? .. Anyone wanna give an explanation a shot, as to how this would work? Wouldn't people just go get insurance as soon as they got sick?

I get the whole Romneycare thing.. It's what the state needed.. And obviously what's good for one state, isn't always good for all the others. But on meet the press today, Romney said he'd keep the ban on pre-existing conditions nationwide.. But he wants to do away with the mandate? .. Anyone wanna give an explanation a shot, as to how this would work? Wouldn't people just go get insurance as soon as they got sick?

Bit confused on this one.

Click to expand...

and now he's flipped again. Mitt changes his positions more frequently than he changes his underwear.... and it's magic underwear to boot!

Would like to see some feedback from other supporters on this. I agree with repealing obamacare.. But keeping this part and removing the mandate seems sort of dumb. Unless indeed he was talking about making a high risk pool.

He changes his mind alot. He was for ACA at first, then against it when campaigning, and now for some of it. He was anti abortion, then pro life. But the truth is, no matter what is said and promise, once they win, they don't fulfill their promises.

I get the whole Romneycare thing.. It's what the state needed.. And obviously what's good for one state, isn't always good for all the others. But on meet the press today, Romney said he'd keep the ban on pre-existing conditions nationwide.. But he wants to do away with the mandate? .. Anyone wanna give an explanation a shot, as to how this would work? Wouldn't people just go get insurance as soon as they got sick?

Bit confused on this one.

Click to expand...

Actually, you couldn't just get insurance when you wanted or after you got sick. There would have to be a waiting period of one year after you apply, so if all of a sudden you are diagnosed with cancer, you can't just go get insurance the next day. The problem with this is that it just defeats the purpose in the end because the person will still be treated, and be uninsured, and will end up filing for bankruptcy. Without the mandate, we end up with a lot of uninsured people who get sick and then everyone else pays for them and it drives up the cost of healthcare for everyone.

In the end, either we go with the mandate and everyone must buy, or if we want to cut costs in healthcare, we just tell those who are uninsured that they only get treatment if they can pay for it up front. Basically, we tell most of them to go home and die without any care at all. Of course, going that route leads us to a one-payer system and universal coverage which is what we will eventually have.

I get the whole Romneycare thing.. It's what the state needed.. And obviously what's good for one state, isn't always good for all the others. But on meet the press today, Romney said he'd keep the ban on pre-existing conditions nationwide.. But he wants to do away with the mandate? .. Anyone wanna give an explanation a shot, as to how this would work? Wouldn't people just go get insurance as soon as they got sick?

Bit confused on this one.

Click to expand...

To confuse the public is his plan.
Have you noticed that he hasn't given any plans at all, for anything?
It's all a big secret until after he's elected.

I get the whole Romneycare thing.. It's what the state needed.. And obviously what's good for one state, isn't always good for all the others. But on meet the press today, Romney said he'd keep the ban on pre-existing conditions nationwide.. But he wants to do away with the mandate? .. Anyone wanna give an explanation a shot, as to how this would work? Wouldn't people just go get insurance as soon as they got sick?

Bit confused on this one.

Click to expand...

In considering the individual mandate, conservatives need to address three questions. First, why is it so troubling that the government is requiring responsible individuals to purchase what they would purchase anyway? Second, is it fair or appropriate to make the responsible pay more in order to protect the rights of the irresponsible? Third, what should be done when the principle of limited government clashes with that of individual responsibility?

Or, put another way, is the principle of limited government so compelling that it should cause us to penalize the responsible and reward the irresponsible?

Romney said that there would be coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. He did not say that insurance companies would be required to insure anyone, even those with pre-existing conditons. The most obvious solution would be to have a separate fund for those who have never had insurance then developed some catastrophic condition. That's the way California mediCal works. I know even people with money that are uninsurable because of chronic disease who are on the state medicaid program.

The only answer I'd like to see, that no one, neither of them, address is what's going to happen with illegals who come here chronically ill just because they know they will get medical care. I hope they will be sent back immediately.

Romney said that there would be coverage for people with pre-existing conditions. He did not say that insurance companies would be required to insure anyone, even those with pre-existing conditons. The most obvious solution would be to have a separate fund for those who have never had insurance then developed some catastrophic condition. That's the way California mediCal works. I know even people with money that are uninsurable because of chronic disease who are on the state medicaid program.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!